UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
         FIFTY-SECOND SESSION
          First Committee

General Debate of the First Committee
Statement by his Excellency
Ambassador Celso L. N. Amorim,
Permanent Representative of Brazil to the United Nations,
New York, 14 october 1997

Mr. Chairman,

I would like to express my satisfaction at seeing you, a distinguished representative of Botswana, as Chairman of the I Committee. It has often been a pleasure working together with Botswana in multilateral fora, not only because chance made us alphabetical neighbors, but also because Botswana has, as Brazil, been a country whose actions are directed to further the cause of peace and international security.

I also want to pay tribute to Ambassador Sychou, of Belarus, for the effective way he conducted this committee during the fifty-first session.

Mr. Chairman,

During the current year we have witnessed some progress in the area of disarmament. Maybe the most important development was the Oslo Conference which adopted the text of a convention on the prohibition of antipersonnel landmines. Brazil remains committed to the Ottawa process and intends to sign the APL convention in December.

It is important to note the close cooperation among Latin American countries during the Ottawa Process, yet another sign that our region enjoys favourable conditions for harmony and peace.

As the Minister of External Relations of Brazil, Ambassador Luiz Felipe Lampreia affirmed, in his statement to the General Assembly, the agenda of the Latin American and Caribbean countries is focused on the process of regional integration and on the development of ever closer links among our societies. Defense procurement in our region aims basically at the replacement of obsolete equipment. Frequently, even the effective participation in UN Peace Keeping operations would require some increase in military related spending as for instance in the case of logistic equipment to support long deployments overseas.

What we witness in our region is an increase in military cooperation among neighboring countries. On this very same day, units of the Armies of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, and observers from Paraguay, are undertaking the second "Southern Cross" operation, the simulation of a field Peace Keeping Operation, that will be inspected, on October 16, by the Presidents of Brazil and Uruguay. This operation is evidence of the increased confidence that the process of integration has brought to the region.

Latin American military expenditures are the lowest in the world in per capita terms. In other continents however, where the average spending is already much higher, some countries, members of military alliances are being summoned to upgrade their inventory, modernize their Armed Forces, make their equipment compatible to that of their allies, and, in brief, rearm and spend more. This is a tendency that we feel should be discouraged.

Despite tht progress we witnessed, one should not remain silent over a worrisome situation: the unlimited development of non-conventional, non-nuclear, new forms or armament, that threatens the international community's reiterated disarmament goals. We believe that some caution should be exercised in this area. Self restraint is necessary in order to avoid a new arms race in sophisticated weapons among the great military powers.

In this pursuit of limiting the development of new weapons, it is also essential to strengthen the prohibition regimes established by the Conventions on Biological and Chemical Weapons. We are confident that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), under the direction of a the Brazilian Director-General, Ambassador Jos‚ Maur¡cio Bustani, will continue making strides towards the full implementation of the CWC. In this regard, we welcome the reassurance by President Boris Ieltsin that the Russian Federation remains committed to the ratification of the Convention as soon as possible.

Since we met last year, Brazil has undertaken a number of initiatives relevant to the I Committee deliberations. On November 7, 1996, the Brazilian Government presented to the Nation a new National Defense Policy. I would like to emphasize some of its principles and goals:

"to contribute actively to the establishment of an international order based on the rule of law, that will provide regional and universal peace and the sustainable development of Mankind;
"to promote Brazil's stance in favour of global disarmament, conditioned to the destruction of nuclear arsenals and other weapons of mass destruction, in a multilaterally negotiated process";

"to take part in international peace keeping operations;"

"to work towards the maintenance of a peaceful and cooperative environment along national borders and to contribute to solidarity in Latin America and the South Atlantic;"

A most significant decision in connection with disarmament and non proliferation was taken on the 20th of June of this year by President Fernando Henrique Cardoso when the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) was submitted to the Brazilian Congress for approval.

The Brazilian position on nuclear disarmament is well known. The option of acquiring nuclear weapons was renounced long ago. Brazil actively participated in the negotiation of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America, the Treaty of Tlatelolco. Later on, Congress decided to include in the Constitution of 1988 additional prohibition clauses regarding such weapons.

The same renunciation was reaffirmed in other legally binding international instruments, namely the bilateral agreement on nuclear cooperation with Argentina, the Quadripartite Safeguards Agreement of which the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is a party, and lately the entry into force of the amended Treaty of Tlatelolco.

In joining the NPT, Brazil intends to further contribute to the cause of non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.

As President Cardoso stated in his message to Congress, Brazil knows that "the NPT by itself does not represent a definitive solution to the problem of nuclear weapons". The Treaty was conceived in the 1960's, as a temporary solution to the problem of nuclear proliferation, which could have led to the increase in numbers of nuclear armed countries, and the multiplication of the risks of nuclear confrontation. Among many other countries, Brazil stressed that the nuclear arms race was not compatible with Article VI of that Treaty.

Developments during the last decade, since the 1987 INF Treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union, have both reflected and accelerated change in this scenario. Nuclear weapons, once considered the cornerstone of security of military alliances, are increasingly seen as a source of unnecessary risk and expense. Enlightened public opinion in the nuclear weapon states is coming to consider them an embarrassment.

International public opinion increasingly realizes:
- that nuclear weapons have no military utility other than, perhaps, to deter other nuclear weapons;
- that a world in which nuclear arsenals were sharply reduced and eventually eliminated would be safer for all.
From its position of authority in the international system, the International Court of Justice has delivered a clear advisory opinion denying legal legitimacy to atomic weaponry. Furthermore the Court concluded that there exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control.

In the more practical realm of national defense needs, the campaign led by Generals Lee Butler and Andrew Goodpaster has done as much against claims to military utility. Their positions come in support of the conclusions reached two years ago by the Canberra Commission, which I had the honor to integrate. After examining the question of the usefulness of nuclear weapons, the Commission reached the unanimous conclusion that nuclear weapons diminish the security of all States, including the States that possess them. The sole way out of the present, and inacceptable situation is to undertake progressive steps that would lead to the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.

In spite of the solemn commitments accepted under the NPT, some still argue that the prohibition of nuclear weapons is unfeasible. This should not be so. A recent report of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States notes that what is unthinkable is the possibility that the current unstable situation can be left unattended without major risks to our own and to future generations.

The resolution that Brazil and a group of like-minded countries intends to table this year on the Nuclear Weapons Free Southern Hemisphere focuses on the promotion of cooperation among the four nuclear free zones towards shared goals of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, is a step in that direction. We expect to consult with all interested delegations in the coming weeks with a view to achieving broad support for the draft.

One of the major challenges of our time is to effectively eliminate nuclear weapons. We see the NPT, the CTBT, the four nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties (Tlatelolco, Rarotonga, Bangkok and Pelindaba) and the recognition of a Nuclear Weapons Free Southern Hemisphere as steps towards the goal of freeing mankind from the nightmare of nuclear destruction. "A world free from nuclear weapons". Such is the stand that Brazil will continue to defend, here in the I Commission, at the CD, and soon, in the Conference of Revision of the NPT in the year 2000.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.